MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3186344031 · doi:10.1145/3450626.3459842

Optimizing UI layouts for deformable face-rig manipulation

2021· article· en· W3186344031 on OpenAlexaff
Joonho Kim, Karan Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFace recognition and analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceFace (sociological concept)Computer graphics (images)SliderInterface (matter)Object (grammar)Human–computer interactionEngineering drawingComputer visionArtificial intelligenceMechanical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Complex deformable face-rigs have many independent parameters that control the shape of the object. A human face has upwards of 50 parameters (FACS Action Units), making conventional UI controls hard to find and operate. Animators address this problem by tediously hand-crafting in-situ layouts of UI controls that serve as visual deformation proxies, and facilitate rapid shape exploration. We propose the automatic creation of such in-situ UI control layouts. We distill the design choices made by animators into mathematical objectives that we optimize as the solution to an integer quadratic programming problem. Our evaluation is three-fold: we show the impact of our design principles on the resulting layouts; we show automated UI layouts for complex and diverse face rigs, comparable to animator handcrafted layouts; and we conduct a user study showing our UI layout to be an effective approach to face-rig manipulation, preferable to a baseline slider interface.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.226 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on GraphicsSame topicFace recognition and analysisFrench-language works237,207